how many games run better on PS5? Because in this fiasco generation I can only count a few, they are sooooo similar. Tbh, I've just seen a bunch of games running better on the PS5 while most games running equal on both, and of those who run better on a single console we can say more than 60% run slightly better on XSX?
The problem for Microsoft is that they are losing more per console compared to Sony while getting pretty much the same results. The chip is, what? 30% bigger, and that is a huge amount of money spent for invisible advantages.
I'm sure that if we were to take only games that have clear advantages on one or the other (so no ambiguous situations, like better framerate on one but better settings on the other, or better framerate on one but slightly higher dynamic res on the other) we could count them on the fingers of one or two hands. The final output is 99% the Pam "they are the same image" meme.
It depends actually here probably about what time frame we are talking about. Most likely SONY pushing for high clocks in 2020 meant their first wave of consoles on were quite expensively binned. This would decrease though over time.
What's strange to me is that it's literally the same company engineering the chips. They know what's the best combination of CU's and frequency for yields and cost. How did Sony came to the conclusion of using a smaller chip with dynamic higher frequencies and Microsoft went in the other direction?
Mantle existed because the other PC gfx API vendors at the time weren't entirely sold or were on the fence about ideas like monolithic pipeline model being easier to apply inlining optimizations for static states without the driver secretly compiling their own internal PSOs behind a developer's backs, persistently mapped device upload memory (AKA pinned memory), more advanced GPU-driven rendering APIs, and the biggest elephant in the room being bindless which was fundamentally incompatible with driver side automatic hazard tracking in comparison to older resource binding models of prior gfx APIs ...
Direct3D on Xbox systems usually have console specific 'extensions' for the developers that do want to apply similar optimizations and you can even bypass their shader compiler with custom HLSL intrinsics that often borderline resembles native ISA!
We don't really know how much NEW 1st party games made specifically for XBOX will make better use of XSX's capabilities, maybe those games would run less well on ps5. Maybe HB2, if available for ps5, wouldn't run as well. Titles using more modern technology also run a bit better on XSX, see: AW2, Avatar. It will be interesting to see how newer games run on ps5 and XSX.
Absolutely, compute heavy games tend to that 20% higher teraflop number, even if even in those there have been some mixed results. But making a console that mostly shows improvements only for engines that aren't that common wasn't the right move, if it was their intention. Maybe they expected more "next gen games" sooner? I mean, they are coming out with something in 2026...We don't really know how much NEW 1st party games made specifically for XBOX will make better use of XSX's capabilities, maybe those games would run less well on ps5. Maybe HB2, if available for ps5, wouldn't run as well. Titles using more modern technology also run a bit better on XSX, see: AW2, Avatar. It will be interesting to see how newer games run on ps5 and XSX.
unfortunately, I couldn't write the number 5 in lowercase, but I think it's still understandable
Calculated risk for Sony. You don't know if yields will improve or not or by how much over time. Fast silicon costs more than slower silicon just due to yield. There is only 20% differential in size between the 2 chips at launch (300mm2 vs 360mm2). MS may have played it overly safe from the beginning to ensure that their costs were inline, and Sony has more freedom to play with given their position in the market.
Interesting. Not sure. 360mm^2 vs 300mm^2Still interesting where graphics will be better an how much better.
Interesting how that is possible what XSX chip is 20% larger and have 50% more transistors?
Dynamic clocks have always made sense, I wonder if switch 2 will have it.Xbox has fixed clocks - during even the most demanding game conditions the frequency shouldn't budge. This means leaving a lot of frequency for peak or even typical clocks on the table.
These are the clocks for the 6700XT, a top bin of the 40 CU Navi 22 RDNA2 chip. Ignore the min max numbers in the box for a moment, because these are actually "99th and 1st percentile, so outliers are excluded".
There are points where the frequency is dropping into the 1900 ~ 2000 mhz range during gaming. This is despite the 6700XT having a higher draw on its own than the entire Series X at the wall.
The Series X has significantly less electrical power available for the GPU than the 6700XT, and it has 30% more CUs to spread it amongst. They also can't bin for different models, and Series X chips had to be locked down and in mass production a little earlier too. Fixed clocks of 1825mhz is pretty damn good for the Series X, and in line with what you'd expect from year 2000 RDNA2.
The idea that Series X clocks are low is unfounded - it's the fixed nature of the clocks that makes them appear low relative to PS5 and particularly PC RDNA2 parts.
The PS5 initially did not have dynamic clocks. According to Cerny in Road to PS5, before dynamic clocks they couldn't maintain 2 ghz.
My guess would be that Cerny decided to add AMD Smartshift (or some version of it) to the PS5 when it was delayed to add RDNA2's ray tracing (or a slightly earlier version of it).
You'll probably have noticed that despite the liquid metal TIM and high power draw, PS5 boost clocks well below RDNA2, but it clocks rather better than RDNA1. IMO this is almost certainly because the design exists somewhere between RDNA1 and RDNA2.
Adding RT and PC APU style boost/power sharing to the PS5 are the two things that almost completely nullified Xbox's hardware advantage, even if it delayed the PS5. It's stuff like this that really shows how very good Mark Cerny is at his job, and not nonsense internet stuff about "fully custom Cerny Geometry engines" or whatever.
SmartShift is about shifting power between the CPU and GPU based on workload, which you would already expect to be happening in an APU. Dynamic clocks have been on the PC for a long time, though I assume Sony's algorithm is different.
